Immigration authorities have detained more people over civil immigration matters in Maine since January 20 than they did in all of 2024. The widespread use of ICE detainers raises concerns about due process rights and exposes towns to expensive liabilities.
All people in the United States are entitled to due process as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. LDs 1259 and 1971 would strengthen the due process rights of all in Maine and ensure violations are not committed using local taxpayer resources through formal partnerships with federal authorities.
Increased Immigration Enforcement and Due Process
Since January 20, more people have been arrested by Customs and Border Patrol in Maine than in all of 2024. As part of this rapid increase in arrests and detentions, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has expanded its use of ICE detainers.
These detainers raise serious constitutional concerns related to due process protections and requirements of the Fourth and Tenth Amendments. ICE detainers are not supported by probable cause, are often issued without notice, and provide limited means to challenge extended detention. Many people arrested and detained have permission to be in the United States, have no criminal record, and are following the law.
Moreover, ICE detainers address civil infractions related to immigration – not criminal activity – yet ICE detainers put many people behind bars.
287(g) Agreements
Under federal law, ICE and CBP are authorized to operate throughout Maine and do not need permission from the state or local governments.
287(g) agreements are contracts between state/local law enforcement agencies and ICE. Under the agreements, local agencies are deputized to take on civil immigration enforcement activities.
These agreements do not improve public safety because local law enforcement can already intervene and address criminal activities occurring in their jurisdiction, regardless of a person’s immigration status. A 287(g) agreement typically only expands their authority and responsibility to enforce civil immigration law as well.
Financial Liability
When towns and cities enter agreement with ICE, they are committing significant financial resources. Local departments must cover the costs of salaries, benefits, overtime, and administration. Many places have spent millions, with some even raising property taxes to cover costs.
Municipalities have also lost millions in legal settlements after violating people’s civil rights when enforcing federal immigration law. States, towns, and cities that take on federal immigration enforcement are responsible for covering the cost of settling lawsuits against them when they violate a person's civil rights. For instance, Maricopa County, Arizona, paid $43 million following lawsuits related to its 287(g) program, largely due to racial profiling. Other municipalities have spent thousands to settle individual claims after they have illegally detained people on ICE orders: Los Angeles County paid $255,000 to settle one person’s claim in 2017 and San Francisco paid $190,000 to settle a claim after local officials illegally turned a person over to ICE.
Community Safety
Community safety is undermined when local law enforcement agencies enter formal agreements with ICE to act as immigration authorities. Immigrants are less likely to report crimes, call for help, share witness statements, and testify in court. The Major Cities Chiefs Association said that “without assurances that contact with the police would not result in purely civil immigration enforcement action, the hard-won trust, communication and cooperation from the immigrant community would disappear.”
All people in Maine deserve to call for help, visit the doctor, attend work or school, and live without fear. We need fair, consistent, and comprehensive immigration reform – not policies that target and terrorize our neighbors and friends.
The Bills in Detail
In line with federal law and prioritizing public safety, LDs 1971 and 1259 would help ensure all people are treated equally under the law by:
- Aligning with the requirements of federal law, while providing a clear framework for Maine law enforcement to use its limited resources to support public safety
- Preserving the ability of Maine law enforcement to respond to requests from immigration authorities for information about individuals’ criminal history and to give access to interview individuals in custody
- Prohibiting Maine law enforcement from stopping, investigating, interrogating, arresting, or detaining a person solely for federal civil immigration enforcement purposes
- Prohibiting state employees other than law enforcement officers from inquiring into immigration status unless such inquiry is required by law or necessary to provide a requested service
- Requiring Maine law enforcement to inform all those detained of their rights before an interview by an immigration authority.
Proposed Amendments to LD 1971: To ensure LD 1971 complies with federal law while prioritizing community safety and due process, the ACLU of Maine has asked lawmakers to delete Sections 2(f) and 3.
Track the bills as they move through the legislative process. Read our testimony on each bill in the PDFs at the bottom of this page or here and here.
